Constructing differences

Architecture, disability, and a glimpse into ways interdisciplinary thought can contribute to greater spatial belonging.

Our built environment controls physical access, flow of movement, and social acceptance of bodies in space. The social and political framework that determines the repression of disabled people and other marginalized bodies is guarded by capitalist systems and institutions that hoard power, allowing an elite few to determine who can be made to feel included.

The restroom, for example, can range from the most mundane to the most imaginative space. Yet contemporary public and private bathrooms remain heavily regulated with strict and consistent building codes limiting construction of what a bathroom space could be. Specifically, sex-segregated bathrooms are a “technology of discipline and power,”1 based on the presentation of gender identity linked to biological sex. The public restroom — with stall doors and walls that don’t quite touch the floor, mirrors aligned next to one another, and minimal sound proofing — is panoptic and invites the surveillance and perpetuation of gender norms.

Different bodies may be subject to targeted physical violence or health risks that result from delaying use of the restroom. According to a former adviser of the New York City Department of Transportation, Quemuel Arroyo, “so many of these ‘accessible’ bathrooms still don’t get it ... and they don’t get it because they’re being designed by people who don’t understand accessibility.” Even codes that created considerations of accessibility, such as the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Universal Design brought about in the 20th century, fail to address the needs of individuals by declaring solutions for predetermined collectives. Because architects continue to treat the compliance standards as a list to be checked off, regulations created to assist disabled people often undermine the original intent of their implementation.

Throughout the evolution of feminist theory, scholars have discussed how the intersection of gender through a range of social characteristics such as sexual orientation, class, race, and ethnicity shapes our perceptions of one another. Yet, historically, disability has not been included within this intersectional framework. How can designers understand accessibility to better address these spatial complexities in our work? What frameworks can be created so that we can move toward a post-compulsory knowledge of inclusion and create sensations of spatial belonging? As more and more people may come to identify as disabled, I pursued undergraduate research opportunities to think critically about the intersections of architecture and diverse bodies. “Constructing Differences” is a project that explores the multiplicities of spatial belonging — comfort/discomfort, inclusion/exclusion, and belonging/estrangement in constructed space. The project resulted in a podcast production and a physical installation and aims to imagine non-existent spaces, work with existing communities and networks, and enact solidarity through design and architecture.

Podcast In April of 2021, I conducted virtual interviews with academics, activists, artists, writers, and students in North America who worked on or surrounding topics of design and disability justice. I wanted to engage individuals through dialogue to become involved with this network and help build upon this dialogue and knowledge-making with the resources and skills I have as an architecture student. I wanted to explore how I can use my education to contribute to the goals that have been set forth by the disability justice activists and communities.

In interviews with individuals such as professor Jay Dolmage, architect Seb Choe, and Dr. Rebecca Garden, I realized how important the multiplicity of disability and other equitable practices are to the progression of architecture and design. All 11 podcast episodes demonstrated the various ways people have collaborated through organizing and writing and how we can be in greater solidarity with one another by using individual strengths to build a more equitable future.

Above: Construction Differences Podcast

Installation “WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE?” is a physical installation that was on display in May 2021 in the atrium of Syracuse University’s School of Architecture. Inspired by multidisciplinary artist Shannon Finnegan (also a guest on the podcast), the artwork is a form of social commentary on the inaccessibility of designed and constructed spaces as well as the normative behaviors and cultures that are normalized around them.

Rug tufting was chosen as a medium for “WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE?” because it provides a formal flexibility and a physical sensation of potential comfort in spaces and on hard surfaces. When placed on these surfaces, the rug acts as a cushion, providing comfort and perhaps a sense of belonging. The viewer no longer has to stand — they feel the urge to sit down or lie down, feeling the woven textures and patterns. Similar to the ways the “Constructing Differences” podcast began dialogue on intersecting ideas of space, the installation intends to inadvertently engage bystanders in an informal manner, leaving them with new perspectives, questions, and ideas to implement into their own work and practice.

Above: photos of the “WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE?” installation

Footnote 1 Bender-Baird, Kyla. “Peeing under Surveillance: Bathrooms, Gender Policing, and Hate Violence.” Gender, Place & Culture 23, no. 7 (2015): 983–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/096636 9x.2015.1073699.

This project was funded by a grant from the Syracuse Office of Undergraduate Research & Creative Engagement (The SOURCE) at Syracuse University. What are we doing here?

“What are we doing here?” is a question that we so often ask ourselves when we experience exclusion in various forms. For example, the traditional cultures of architecture school have made so many individuals from various racial, gender, class, and disability groups question their belonging within institutions. Thinking about our capacities Above: 3’ x 4’ design of what for joy, pleasure, installation rug, noting color and and hope, we might texture variation from light to dark consider what we labor blue and light to dark orange. for. What do we want to achieve through the struggles against homonormative modes of operation? Above: 3’ x 2’ design of installation rugs for “Lay & rest, there is more here,” noting color and texture variations from orange on top of light to dark green.

Lay & Rest, there is more here The construction of the infamous 1:12 ramp brings attention to the limitations of compliant design, as architects and designers often treat accessibility as an afterthought. That thought is often limited to physical disabilities addressed by simple interventions such as the ramp and the elevator. The ramp in this installation, which is divided and constructed in three pieces, suggests the metaphor of collapse, a generative idea that is extracted from disability to think about different and more sustainable tools and systems, as Dolmage discusses in the “Constructing Differences” podcast.

The use of the rugs invites viewers to think about interactions in spaces such as the ramp differently. The verbs “lay” and “rest” seek to bend time for different movements and operations on a structure designed strictly for movement.

Julia Chou

Chou is a thesis student at the Syracuse University School of Architecture and is a representative of the DEI Student Committee as part of her dedication to equitable design practices. Chow worked as an Educational Intern at HKS in the summer of 2021.